Air

Chief, if4111: Chief, BE

Chief of itianion, frenkfort

Gporational/CARTALUFOs COM

Report on Remmeirm-Derman LandaseneeshaftOrgemisetions

REPIROCR: ICitt ...13501, 14 December 1954

1. Pmmarded heremith is (:: .3 ostndr on Romaniems.GernauLandmirminmehaft orgoeisatione referred to in Reference. As reported (rme MR4-14016 27 domary 1955) the LazdsaApJthft o Banat Swabians has joined theIhnemaisaCoordination Center and - , believes this will forme the

landensommehaft of Transylvanian cs to join the Coordination Center'without farther ado.

ilm::

2. With reforence to page 2 of Attachment E of bafereneejetatee that be has now determined from Peter C213TARTIMMCV that the memo of

on-captain of the Rumanian General Staff and en agmat is Sidman 8AVAT1300(galled oNDGEm). Be also states that MIMI, is net the correct sone for theMajor mmaticemed hero; the correct ammo is Ion TOBA.

5. MOB has the fellettraorm which solar tab* identical to TOO*and 5AITATI.:SCI4 both are from ' card file at MCO:

a. 'IBA, Major - Organised in Germany, towards the end of world WarII, for BROWZRXI, two paratroop companies. TOBA bad been given this task ky theGerman military authorities and had organised the °ampules with Romanians ohmshe bad reoroited in internment camps in Germany. Bost of the pwremenal wereofficers *CO* and midst, who bad been attending rarmialisation courage inG. ;before their internment. Nene of 70B 0s omits merm parachuted into

Bemenia, although arm of the mita organised WI the lagiomairms was. TGBAallegedly reported voluntarilyte the (Commaist) authorities in Reeania, was'tried, sentented, aid is new at Woe bei Wien, in Austria. It is also allegedthat ?ODA wee peen in Yiemmend that be probably works for the Soriets. (0A3.

July 50, CAS. 2/1).'

1. "SANATLSCD, Roe (nickname) - Cavalry officer, brother of GeneralConstantin SARAT:..SCU. Subject is a talented MIR and a good officer, has a Pronehnether; speaks many foreign languaees. Before world ...ar II, subject was a' pedals% on Bulgaria in the Romanian General Staff. In 1935-34 acting enorders from the General itaff, falbject joined the Iron Guard for penstratimpurposes, participated in the Legionary beballiso and was eentensed to between

3 1. Jan. 1955

C013/DECLASS IF I ED AND RELEASED BY

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCYSOURCES M ETHODSEXEMPT ION 3B2BNAZI WAR CR IMES DISCLOSURE ACT

DATE 2006

3.1-33-2/6:0

*tot, 1.11 MA-14034

1$ and 20 years in prise*. Alter two maths h. was robsbIlitsted4 babjsst winism in Violas 1* 1949. ito sows to to now wirklas for the 0***1*ss. Adz30, v. ca.s. s/s).•

4. Trims aro 74il4I4 as 202A and SMIATo5C0 or 31VATi4C0.

knoloassrosAs slated above

Jsmory 1955

01stribtrtlos,4- wAos ow/ -1111/KCS- coa iffis• .

3 - vAlos

November 1954

The Rumaniam-GermanLandemannschaft Organisations

1. They are:

a. Landsmannschaft of Sathmar Swabian.Chairman: Stefan SCSMIEDAddress, Lenbae, kreis Kempten.

b. Community of German . Resettle= from BessarabiaChairman: ?Address: Stuttgart-W, Johannesetraese 23.

o. Landemannschaft of Dobrudsha GermansChairman, (?) KLETTAddress: Stuttgart-W, Johannesstrasee 23.

d. Land:mann:when of Banat SwabiansChairman: Prof. Anton VALENTINAddress: Sigmaringen, Bergetrasse 4.

e. Landsmannachaft of Bukovina GermansChairman; Dr. Rudolf WAGNERAddress: Munich, Himmelreichatrasse 3.

f. Landemannsohaft of Transylvanian SaxonsChairman, Dr. Heinrich ZILLICRAddress, Munich, Himmelreichstrasse 3.

2. The special characteristic of the Rumanian Germans now in Germanyis that they were actually not expelled from Rumania. The Germansfrom BUkovina and Bessarabia were resettled from these provinces toGermany in 1940. This resettlement was effected on the basis of atreaty between the Third Reich and the Soviet Union after Rumaniawas forced by ultimatum on 27 July 1940 to yield Bukovina andBessarabia to the Soviet Union within four days. The DobrudshaGermans were resettled to Germany the same year (1940) withoutcompulsion on the basis of a treaty between Germany and Rumania.Part of the Transylvanian Saxons (those who lived in North-Transylvania) were resettled to Germany in 1940-1941 after Rumaniawas forced in late August 1940, though an Italian-Germ= ultimatum,to yield North-Transylvania to Hungary. This resettlement waseffected on the basis of a treaty between Germany and Hungary.The major portion of Transylvanian Saxons as well as the BanatSwabians who are now in Germany are outside Rumania for thefollowing reasons:

3-2- Arck--

a. They are former members of the Waffen-SS who did not return toRumania after the war. (Membership in the Waffen-SS was voluntary.)

b. They are persons who escaped to Germany or Austria along with theGarman troops during the Soviet entrance into Rumania.

c. They are Rumanian-Germans who escaped to the Meet from Rumaniaafter the war.

3. It can thus be seen that the designation of "expellees" applies tothe Rumanian-Germans neither in legal respect nor in reality. Thaiare Rumanian emigrants of German ethnic origin although this actuallyItPPlies only to the Transylvanian Saxons, Sathmar Swabians and BanatSwabian.. (The Bukovina- Bessarabia- and Dobrudsha Germans areneither expellees nor emigrants but resettlers$ they can be olassifiedexpellees only inasfar as they were actually expelled in 1945-1946by the Soviets or Poles from East Germany where they had initiallysettled.) Consequently, when speaking of Rumanian-German Landsman-schaft organisations one should refer only to the TransylvanianSaxons, Sathmar Swabiana and Banat Swabians sinoe'they are theLindens/mac:theft organisations which today have oorresponding Germangroups who are still in Rumania. More than 200,000 Saxons (includingthe Sathmar Swabian.) are still living in Transylvania today, andmore than 300,000 Swabians are living in the Banat.

4. Although the Sathmar Swabians were a small separate group inTransylvania, they were always under the "guardianship" of theTransylvanian Saxons. The same relation exists today in regardto their respective Landsmannschafte, which constitute separateorganisations only in name.

5. The Landsmannschaft organizations of Bukovina, Bessarabia- andDobrudsha-Germans do not represent any ethnic groups still inexistenoe in these areas today. The Landemannechaft organisationsof Bessarabia- and Dobrudsha-Germane are not politically active.The Landemannschaft of Bukovina-Germans however engages in livelypolitical activity. On the one hand, it has found a platform ininternal West German politics within the circle of the BEE - All-German Bloc. (Dr. Rudolf WAGNER is a close co-worker of Prof. Dr.Theodor OBERLAENDER and heads the BEE in Bavaria.) In addition,it engages in foreign-policy activity in connection with theproblem of Eastern Europe's re-organisation after the liberation.This activity is reflected in the holding of cultural meetingswhich reveal that the Bukovina-Germans still adhere to the lineof the Austro-Rungarian dual monarchy as it existed prior to 1918.It was Vienna's endeavor at that time (prior to 1918) to displacethe original and almost exclusively Rumanian population of Bukovinathrough extensive settling of German families ae well as immigration(from Galioia) and preferential treatment of Ukrainians. Thisconformed to the Austrian desire to have reliable German elements

-2-

on the Russian border, and to arouse Ukrainian national sentimentby giving preference to Austrian Ukrainians. They hoped thus toproduce anti-Russian end thus centrifugal tendencies among theUkrainians with a view to weakening the Russian empire. ThisAustrian policy in Bukovina was also supported by the Catholicchurch as it insured the advance Of Catholicism into the domainof Orthodoxy. The Germans from BUkovina wars Catholics and the .Ukrainians who immigrated from Galicia belonged to the United Church.The present cultural meetings of the Landemannschaft of Bukovina-Germazus are always attended by the Ukrainians as prominent guests.

6. At a conference in 1949 between Dr. Rudolf WAGNER and VasileDUEITRESCU, Dr. WAGNER turned down DWITHESCU l e invitation thatthe Landsmannschaft of Bukovina-Germans join the Rumanian emigration.This on the grounds that the Landsmannechaft did not want to committhemselves as it could not be predicted whether, after liberation,Rukovina will remain part of the Ukraine or will be re-inoorporatedinto Rumania. Since this conference there have been virtually nocontacts between the Landemannachaft of Bukovina-Germans and theRumanian emigration. In a !single instance, this Landamannsohaft.took part in a Rumanian affair when in 1951 the Work Community ofRumanian-German Landsmanneohaft organisations was founded to preventthe Association of Germane from Rumania (ma) from claiming to speakin the name of Germane from Rumania and thus to lessen the VDRImreputation with the League of Pre. Rumanians. General Nicola.RADESCU replied to a letter of the Work Community to state thatthe protest of the Work Community was objectleas, as the targetof their attack, via. Rerwart SCHEZNER, had never spoken in thename of his organisation in olaiming to represent the RumanianGermans. This Work Community has not been beard of ever since.

7. In 1953 the Landemannechaft of Bukovina-Germans invited GrigoreMANOILESCU, head of the Rumanian Institute in Munich (Iron Guard,SIMA-group), to speak at the cultural meeting in October in additionto the scheduled Ukrainian orator. MANOILESCU made a sharp speechagainst the Ukrainian claims to Bukovina, which led in turn to anti-Rumanian statements in the Ukrainian prose and anti-Ukrainian retortsin the Rumanian press. The Ukrainians then founded an Associationof Ukrainians from Bukovina in Munich under the chairmanship of theUkrainian Socialist Ilko POPOVICH, in order to propagate a UkrainianBukovina. According to SCHEIRER, as a result of this strugglerelations between the Ukrainians and the Landemannsohaft of Rukovina-Germans have become still closer and have led de facto to a workcommunity of anti-Rumanian oharaoter. •

8. Although the VDR manager, Hanns LUDWAR, is a board member of theLandsmannsohaft of Bukovina-Germans, relations of the Rumanianemigration with this Landemannechaft are still very tense at present.The Landemannsohaft has continued to take a pronounoed anti-Rumanianattitude. It must be expected that the Landemannachaft may also in-fluence the inland Germans, though the BUR and possibly other Germancircles, against the Rumanian emigration.

-3-

9. Of more importanoe to the Rumanian emigration, however, are theLandamannsohaft organisations of Transylvanian Saxone and BanatSwabian,. First, their areas of settlement are still on Rumanianterritory and, secondly, the majority of Transylvanian Saxons andBanat Swabian° still live in the home country. , Itma, these ethnicgroups will have a voice also in a free Rumania and will oOntributetheir share to the country's re-organisation. Therefore, theattitudes of these two Landemannechaft orcanisations pertainingto Rumanian questions are now important in exile, both in theinfluencing of both public opinion and political factors in Germany.From this results the significance of these Landamannechaft or-ganizationa l attitude toward this or the other Rumanian group-in-exile.

Landsmannschaft of Banat Swabianst

10. The Banat Swabituis are part of the so-called Danube Swabian', i.e.the Germans who settled at the three-country-corner (Hungary,Yugoslavia and Rumania). At the end of the 19th and the beginningof the 20th century the Hungarians conduoted a policy of magyarizationtoward the Danube Swabiana with the result that though the rusticbasis of the Danube Swabians remained German the intelligentsia

. became Hungarian. (I continuation of this policy would probablyhave de-Germanized the peasantry within the course of time, as wasthe case with the Sathmar Swabians.) After the first world war theterritory where the Danube Swabians had settled was distributed amongHungary, Yugoslavia and Rumania under consideration of nationalconditions. As a oonsequence, the formerly consolidated ethnicgroup was split. However, the parts which were incorporated intoYugoslavia and Rumania were able to recover and continue to developtheir German character. The Banat Swabiana were friendly toward theRumanian° and they display the same attitude in the emigration.Nevertheless, their Landsmannsohaft has been very reserved towardRumanian problems and groups-in-exile.

11. The Danube Swabian° who were expelled from Hungary and Yugoslaviaconstitute the majority of their ethnic group in the West, and theDanube Swabian° from the Rumanian Banat the minority. The formerattempted to solve the Danube Swabiane l chief problem, the restorationof the ethnic group'a. unity, by mapping out the plan to form anindependent Danube Swabian state within the framework of a Danubefederation. Until 1950 this concept was advocated espeoially inDanube Swabian circles in Austria and strongly propagated by thenewspaper Neuland. It is evident though that the aohievement ofsuch a Danube Swabian state would necessitate the separation ofareas from the Hungarian, Yugoslav and Rumanian territories, and,when Yugoslavia alienated herself from Moscow and the German FederalRepublic established diplomatic relations with Belgrade, the un-realistic nature of this project became apparent. (As previouslyreported, the Catholic church also has reversed its attitude in thesame way.)

-4-

12. The Landamannschaft of Banat Swabian• (i.e. the portion of thaDanube Swabian ethnic group belonging to Rumania) has so far al-ways kept out of Rumanian politios-in-exile, although as early as1951 (fall) General Piston CHIRMOAGA (former Minister of War in theIron Ouardist government-in-exile in Vienna) attempted to win theLandemannschaft for 000peration with the Iron Guard. Only in theeingle instance mentioned of the work community, has this Lands-mannechaft dealt with Rumanian questions-in-exile. In August 1954,General Ion CHROME attempted to utilise this Landemannaohaft(as sell as those of the Bukovina-Germans and Transylvanian Saxons)for his ends by appealing to them to participate in the organisationof the meeting he (the Association of Free Rumanians in Germany - VFW)scheduled for 22 August 1954 (as a oounter..aotion against the meetingof the Rumanian Coordinating Center). However, the Landsmanneohaftof Banat Swabians (as the other Landemannschaft organisations) .didnot send a representative to the suggested oanferenoe nor did itanswer the TFRD letter. In consideration of the above, the letterof the ohairman of this Landemannsohaft inanswer to the RumanianCoordination Center's invitation for the meeting on 22 August 1954is of special significance. He wrote in substanoet "On 3 August1954 it was the 55th anniversary of the incorporation into the newly-created great-Rumanian state of a part of the Banat. We BanatSwabians have remained loyal to the Rumanian State and consider theRumanian people righteous supporters of a just national formationof the Southeast European territory in the spirit of a new, supra-national European community order." This is an unequivooal deolarationof loyalty toward Rumania, which has been done for the first time since1945. (The fact that Prof. Anton VALENTIN thus expressed himselftoward the Rumanian Coordination Center was interpreted in circlesof the Coordination Center as a step toward future cooperation ofthe Landsmannachaft with the Coordination Canter.)

Landemannedhaft of Transylvanian Saxons:

13. The Transylvanian Saxons have played a leading role among the Rumanian-Germans. It is not only the oldest and the numerically largest butalso the only group which played a role in the history of the Rumanianpeople. First, it favorably influenced the Rumanians' culturaldevelopment; secondly, it was a politically and eeonomically leadingnation of Transylvania. The Saxone had special privileges on theirarea of settlement by grant of the Hungarian crown. Therefore theSaxons wore able to reach a degree of economic, cultural and politicaldevelopment that no other group in Southeast Europe did and thus assumedthe leading role among these groups. When after 1848 the period ofHungarian nationalism began, the Transylvanian Saxons, whom theHungarians deprived of their special privileges, were also subjectedto an arbitrary policy of magyarisation. This fact resulted in anapproach to the Rumanians of Transylvania on the part of the Saxons.

-5-

14. When after 1918 the Rumanians of Transylvania decided for incorporationinto Rumania they were supported by the Saxons. However, life in theframework of the Rumanian State brought the Transylvanian Saxons variousdisappointments -not only did they not regain their special privileges,but an extensive ground reform in 1923 also curtailed the Saxon nationalproperty.

15. With the rise of National Socialism in Germany the group of TransylvanianSaxons was also given strong impulses, and the stronger Germany grewthe more noticeable became anti-Rumanian and anti-Hungarian trendsamong the Saxons aimed at an independent Transylvania under Saxonleadership as a German protectorate. These hopes did not materializeand, upon German desire, Transylvania was distributed among Rumaniaand Hungary when both countries became Germany's allies. After theseoond world war the whole of Transylvania became Rumanian territory,and the Saxons suffered heavy damages. Complete expropriation, accord-ing to Communist principles, and deportations to the Soviet Union havedebilitated and strongly reduced, numerically, this ethnic group.This explains desires expressed within the Landemannsohaft to resettlethe Transylvanian Saxons in German Eastern areas which will be re-.aoquired after liberation. This is one basic reason for the Lands'mannechaft's reserved attitude toward the Rumanian emigration. Antherresults from the fear of endangering fellow-countrymen in the homelandby anti-Communist aotions in conjunction with the Rumanian emigration.

16. Thum as early as 1949 when General Ion GBEORGHE published the news-paper Petrie and got into contact with the Rumanian German HereartSCHEIRER, the Landsaannsohaft protested against this step. SCHEIRERwas celled a traitor of the people and "Rumanian hireling" for workingso closely with the Rumanian emigration. When in 1950 the VDR wasfounded, the Landsmanneohaft decided that any, Saxon joining the VDRwould be expclled from the Landsmannechaft. When in 1951 the Leagueof Free Rumanians we founded and the VDR joined it, the WorkCommunity of Rumanian-German Landsmanneohaft Organizations wasformed at the instigation of the Landsmanneohaft of TransylvanianSaxons in order to protest to RAX:SCU against SCHEIRER who they saidwas not authorized to speak in the name of the Rumanian-Germans.When in 1951 General GHEORCHE, through SCHEIRER, established contactsin Bonn, viz. the Press and Information Office (Carl ARIO), theForeign Office (Dr. KOSSOANN) and the Ministry for All-German Affairs(Ministerialrat von ZAHN), the Saxons attempted (through Dr. ZILLICHand especially Hans HARTL who has good contacts with Dr. KOSSMARN)to discredit SCHEIRER by calling him an American agent. In 1952Erhard PLESCH, now chairman of the Landemannechaft in Bavaria andLending candidate of the BRE, conducted an motion with the objectiveto separate General MON= from SCHEIRER. PLMSCH promised AndreiNICOLA that the Landemanneohaft would procure funds from Bonn forPetrie provided that relations with SCHEIRER were severed. Thereupon,NICOLA persuaded General GHEORGHE to get into contact with Dr. ZILLION,without SCREINER's knowledge, which the General did. When the Lands-

- 6 -

mannschaft considered their objective of breaking relations betweenMORGUE and SCHEIRER as won, Dr. ZILLICH then told General GREORGREthat the Landsmannechaft could not engage in active anti-Communistpolitics and could not tie itself to any group in view of the dis-integration of the Rumanian emigration. That this was simply a readyexcuse is evidenced by the fact that in his speech in Dinkelebushl,at the Whitsuntide meeting of the Landsmannsehaft (1952), ZILLICRsaid, referring to General PRHALA I s agreement with the Sudeten Germans,that he had not heard yet a Rumanian General acknowledges theTransylvanian Saxons' right to the homeland and restitution and,with the expression of "not states but peoples make the Occident"he indirectly professed Otto von HABSBURG's propaganda thesis,and the separation of Transylvania from Rumaiia. Thereupon GREORGHBattacked the Landsmannschaft in Petrie in an exceptionally Sharpmanner which made him unpopular in Bonn. •

17. When in March 1954 the Rumanian Club, Munich, was founded, Vasil*DUMITRRSOU happened to meet PLESCR. PL2ZOR showed interest in theevents within the VFRD and asked DUNITMCU (when learning aboutthe split) whether he would like to talk to Bans HARTL. MITRES=agreed. RARTL was very friendly at the meeting and wanted to knowwhether the Club was known in Bonn. Re implied that Bonn (nospecifioations) would like to speak with a Rumanian group. MITRES=stated that the Club was not a suitable organization but couldpossibly become such within a short time and then contacts withBonn could be established.

18. On 8 July 1954 when the Rumanian Coordination Center was founded,the Work Community of Rumanian-German Landsmannechaft Organisationswas also invited to join the Center. The invitation remained un-answered since this Work Community in reality does not exist anymore.

19. After the meeting on 22 August 1954 the individual Landemanneohaftorganizations were subsequently invited to participate in the workof the Coordination Center. A second talk between DOUITRYSCU andHARTL took place on 20 October 1954 (at DUMITHESCU l e request) con-cerning the invitation to the Trensylvenian Saxons to join theCoordination Center. HART1 stated that as far as the CoordinationCenter is concerned, SCHFINRR is the only obstacle to the Lands-mannschaft's joining the Center ainoe SCHFLIER would be acknowledgedthrough the Landsmannechaft l e membership. However, though the Lands-mannachaft would not yet join the Center officially, they would sendtwo representatives to the sessions as observers. A relaxationshall lead to actual 000peration in the Pleurae of time. On 5 November1954 the Landemannschaft officially answered the Coordination Center'sletter. The wording ran as followes"Dear Sires At out last federal board uesaion we have taken notice ofand dealt with your letter of 29 September 1954. Our Landsmannschaft'sjoining of your Coordination Center is oonneoted with difficulties

-7-

for a number of reasons. We are gladly willing to expound thesereasons to you in detail. FOr this purpose two of our gentlemen,if you so desire, will participate in one of your meetings and dis-cuss the situation with you. If you are interested in such a dis-cussion in your circle please inform us of the time and place ofyour next meeting. Thanking you for your offer of cooperation,We are, Respectfully, Hans HARTL."

•

20. At the same meeting on 20 October 1954 HARTL also told DUMITRESOUthe fralowings

a. The Landsmannsohaft has no contaots whatsoever with the RumanianPeople's Republic. Intervention has merely been made throughGerman circles (not specified) to unite separated families.

b. The Landsmannsohaft has no contacts with Hungarian or Habsburgcircles. These circles had unsuocesefUlly attempted to win theLandsmannechaft for their interests.

c. The Landemannechaft is not opposed to Rumania and does not rej'eotcooperation with the Rumanian exile. But the Landemennsohaft wouldlike to have the right, also in the future, to cultivate contactswith all groups.

21. In conclusion it need only be repeated that should one of theRumanian emigre groups suoosed in gaining an agreement with eitherthe Landamannsohaft of Transylvanian Saxons or the Banat Swabiansor both their position will be immeasurably inproveds (a) becauseof the, sise and ooherenos of these two organisations (b) theirinfluence in Bonn and with the German people.

- 8 -3 ;2--